Avicus DuSang
The Patron Saint of Heartache
[member="Jay Scott Clark"] I didn't get raped, okay?
Star Wars Roleplay: Chaos
Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
Are Jedi Evil, but just have good press officers [spoilers]
- Thread starter sabrina
- Start date
-
- Tags
- discussion
Ludolf Vaas
"Trust me"
I'll say something very similar to what I did in the Sith thread. The Jedi are shown to be objectively good in canon, while the Sith are shown to be objectively evil.
Remember though - this has nothing to do with their ideologies themselves. Rather Star Wars was written from a liberal modern perspective, which upholds certain ideals while condemning others. This is why the Jedi are "good" and the Sith are "evil".
The coin could easily be flipped the other way, though. Again, while the Sith and Empire are portrayed as evil, Star Wars never shows the ideals of the Republic and the Jedi taken to their own logical extremes. Democracy is shown to be the way forward for man, never an ineffective, impotent kakistocracy (though I guess the prequels maybe showed this a bit). The absence of emotion is illustrated as something to strive for, never a dangerous idea that risks cutting a man's tethers to his own humanity. The Jedi code could just as easily justify evil, insidious behavior.
A good example - has anyone seen the movie Equilibrium? That's what worlds would look like if the Jedi supplanted their philosophy onto the galaxy at large.
Remember though - this has nothing to do with their ideologies themselves. Rather Star Wars was written from a liberal modern perspective, which upholds certain ideals while condemning others. This is why the Jedi are "good" and the Sith are "evil".
The coin could easily be flipped the other way, though. Again, while the Sith and Empire are portrayed as evil, Star Wars never shows the ideals of the Republic and the Jedi taken to their own logical extremes. Democracy is shown to be the way forward for man, never an ineffective, impotent kakistocracy (though I guess the prequels maybe showed this a bit). The absence of emotion is illustrated as something to strive for, never a dangerous idea that risks cutting a man's tethers to his own humanity. The Jedi code could just as easily justify evil, insidious behavior.
A good example - has anyone seen the movie Equilibrium? That's what worlds would look like if the Jedi supplanted their philosophy onto the galaxy at large.
Ignatius
A N A R C H Y
[member="HaloHeroWolf118"], No, I mean an instance where it proves that they said it or written documentation that the Jedi did not try to limit the deaths of troops.
We can go to RC-1207 where he was left behind on a blowing up starship because Yoda decided that sending a rescue party would only kill all of the troops that he sent. He held them back to only let 1207 to die instead of all of the Delta Squad. Right there it proves that even Yoda did try to limit death. Even if it meant the death of one, He continued the use of Delta Squad.
Now I want to see you provide an instance where they did not try to limit the deaths.
We can go to RC-1207 where he was left behind on a blowing up starship because Yoda decided that sending a rescue party would only kill all of the troops that he sent. He held them back to only let 1207 to die instead of all of the Delta Squad. Right there it proves that even Yoda did try to limit death. Even if it meant the death of one, He continued the use of Delta Squad.
Now I want to see you provide an instance where they did not try to limit the deaths.
HaloHeroWolf118
New Member
I'm not that big of a Star Wars nerd man.
Ignatius
A N A R C H Y
[member="HaloHeroWolf118"], Then read more things before you spit out ideals that you cannot back up.
S N A K E
[member="HaloHeroWolf118"]
The clones were engineered to fight for the Republic no matter what the cost. I don't see how the Jedi are evil on leading the clones in a war. Besides, the Jedi went on the front lines with their soldiers not cover the rear and cower like Krell did.
The clones were engineered to fight for the Republic no matter what the cost. I don't see how the Jedi are evil on leading the clones in a war. Besides, the Jedi went on the front lines with their soldiers not cover the rear and cower like Krell did.
Avicus DuSang
The Patron Saint of Heartache
Whoa, [member="Erin Darkstar"]. You can't holla at a dude like that for not being a walking Wookiepedia.
Peeps be entitled to opinions. Especially on fiction.
Peeps be entitled to opinions. Especially on fiction.
S H A D O W
Good and Evil are based on perception. All I'm going to say about this subject also keep it civil people this is your one and only warning </tips staff hat>
Ludolf Vaas
"Trust me"
That is insane moral relativism. I'm reminded of a Shakespeare quote:Spencer Jacobs said:
"There is nothing either good or bad, but thinking makes it so."
It's helpful to note that Hamlet said this when he was pretending to be insane. In other words, Shakespeare was saying that moral relativism isn't just crazy, it's fake crazy. As in no one is crazy enough to believe it.
S N A K E
I would suggest reading the Lucifer Effect. Really good book for the definitions of both good and evil.
Seydon of Arda
Raquor'daan
Evil is:
Infinite scroll pages.
Leaving lego's in the bathroom at night.
Running out of chocolate milk.
[member="Popo"]'s nudes.
These are undeniable things of universal malice.
Infinite scroll pages.
Leaving lego's in the bathroom at night.
Running out of chocolate milk.
[member="Popo"]'s nudes.
These are undeniable things of universal malice.
S H A D O W
I say it because it can be argued that the person doing "evil" can believe that they are not evil, but they are evil because of societies perception. Like I said its perception.
Ignatius
A N A R C H Y
sorry, I used the wrong words. I am not trying to start anything. But as the man said himself he knew little on the canon.Avicus DuSang said:
I apologize for sounding rude to anyone. I had no intnetions to do so. I am telling him that he should read up on more information before he tries to voice his theories.
The Arch Wilder
Wow this thread moved fast. Annyyywaaays. After the Mando Wars, Revan and Malak went on a journey, met sith emporer and...
Furthermore, I remember an occasion in which a jedi master helped his troops in the battle of Ryloth, DYING ALONGSIDE THEM. They may not have been able to save all their men, but it was WAR! And they certainly had the decency to fight by the sides of their men. Instances where jedi actively tried to help their clone friends, Anakin shortly before the death of Fives. Anakin tried to help him in the moments before he was gunned down, an action which he tried to stop.
Runi Beskar
OOC Account
As I said in the Sith thread...
There is and never has been a "good" or "evil" side to the universe. Sure in the movies the Sith are written as being evil but if you think really hard about it then the Sith and Jedi are just biased about there own side, they refuse to accept new things and they see each other as in the wrong. But really in a war like the one between the Jedi and the Sith, the only person who is ever going to get something out of it are the banks funding the sides.
There is and never has been a "good" or "evil" side to the universe. Sure in the movies the Sith are written as being evil but if you think really hard about it then the Sith and Jedi are just biased about there own side, they refuse to accept new things and they see each other as in the wrong. But really in a war like the one between the Jedi and the Sith, the only person who is ever going to get something out of it are the banks funding the sides.
Really, people, good and bad, good and evil, right and wrong, all of that has always existed. It's pointless to say these don't exist. Good and evil sides have existed and that is, like Spencer has spoken, society's perception. I may add that it is because of morality. If you say there is no good and evil, I may (forgive me for such a wording) think you are a bit silly. For example (which is quite exaggerated), when has been killing babies and eating their flesh good? I would say it's quite evil. Yes, it may be Stupid Evil, but it's still evil.
Going on. A person can't be completely good or completely evil, a society can't be it, nothing can be. That's like the philosophy of Yin and Yang... So when a person can't be either completely evil or completely good, their acts, their behaviour can be it. If a person doesn't act according to morality, he is seen as bad or evil. If a person does that, he is seen as good.
That's how easy it is.
Jedi are the good ones, Sith are the bad ones. There is no point in discussing it as such discussions lead nowhere. In reality, things are a lot more complicated. For the sake of story and action, Star Wars is not that realistic.
Going on. A person can't be completely good or completely evil, a society can't be it, nothing can be. That's like the philosophy of Yin and Yang... So when a person can't be either completely evil or completely good, their acts, their behaviour can be it. If a person doesn't act according to morality, he is seen as bad or evil. If a person does that, he is seen as good.
That's how easy it is.
Jedi are the good ones, Sith are the bad ones. There is no point in discussing it as such discussions lead nowhere. In reality, things are a lot more complicated. For the sake of story and action, Star Wars is not that realistic.
Avicus DuSang
The Patron Saint of Heartache
-scoffs-
Javar Ikon
Seriously, not a Bartender
I'll bite.....
The Jedi are hypocritical to their code. They form attachment pretty often (Revan, Meetra Surik, Anakin, Satele Shan.... The fact that a 'Shan bloodline' exists is proof of this.)
The Sith are also hypocritical to their code. The Sith were formed on the principle that 'peace is a lie'. But the Sith who are able to look at the bigger picture see order as their goal, albeit order with Sith at the head.
Anybody who claims to follow, or does follow either code completely is either:
a) lying (either one)
b ) not particularly bright (either one)
c) a murderous maniac (Sith)
d) a sex fiend (Sith; passion = power, right?)
e) in a coma (Jedi)
f) a spectacularly boring person (Jedi)
or
g) A a spectacularly boring, murderous, stupid, sex fiend in a coma who happens to be lying.
The Jedi are hypocritical to their code. They form attachment pretty often (Revan, Meetra Surik, Anakin, Satele Shan.... The fact that a 'Shan bloodline' exists is proof of this.)
The Sith are also hypocritical to their code. The Sith were formed on the principle that 'peace is a lie'. But the Sith who are able to look at the bigger picture see order as their goal, albeit order with Sith at the head.
Anybody who claims to follow, or does follow either code completely is either:
a) lying (either one)
b ) not particularly bright (either one)
c) a murderous maniac (Sith)
d) a sex fiend (Sith; passion = power, right?)
e) in a coma (Jedi)
f) a spectacularly boring person (Jedi)
or
g) A a spectacularly boring, murderous, stupid, sex fiend in a coma who happens to be lying.
Well-Known Member
Those examples aren't very good since those are individuals, that only goes to show no matter how good a religion's tenets, we are all still susceptible to mistakes and lapses of bad judgement (emotions).
In order to prove they were evil without a doubt, you would have to look at their order as a whole and actions the vaste majority agreed upon at the time that held a outstandingly greater negative effect over a potential positive, while factoring in things like the intention and desired result of that action whether or not it came to be that way.
If you cannot prove without a doubt they meant ill, or were DIRECTLY responsible for outstanding negative actions on a regular basis over the course of their history, then they aren't evil from the perspective of universal negatives and positives in reference to the stability of all sapient things.
In order to prove they were evil without a doubt, you would have to look at their order as a whole and actions the vaste majority agreed upon at the time that held a outstandingly greater negative effect over a potential positive, while factoring in things like the intention and desired result of that action whether or not it came to be that way.
If you cannot prove without a doubt they meant ill, or were DIRECTLY responsible for outstanding negative actions on a regular basis over the course of their history, then they aren't evil from the perspective of universal negatives and positives in reference to the stability of all sapient things.